Re: UKNM: RE: UKNM Digest V1 #115

[Ray Taylor]

[Sam says: it's been an interesting thread, but has probably run its course for the mo, if you want to carry on, can you do it off list...Thanx.]


From: Nick Sellors <

nickderby [dot] org

>


>Install $250 (156GBP)

>Annual ~$4300 (~2700GBP)

>

>Cost of a 1Mb/s circuit (BT) from central London to our Telehouse

>PoP is

>

>Install 4615GBP

>Annual 8848GBP

>



So, I'm right then? UK ISP prices are too high? (BT is counted as an ISP

isn't it?) If BT is abusing its monopoly position would it not make sense

for a big ISP (such as PSI) to invest in some infrastructure? Forgive me if

I am missing the point but if there is that much demand for bandwidth why is

there still no alternative to BT's network? How long ago did Thatcher

privatise BT?


>>UK prices are higher because most UK customers are too stupid to know the

>>difference. If PSINet UK can get away with it, good luck to you. Make the

>>most of it while you can.

>

>You are mistaken.

>



Shurely no mistake? If there is a huge variance in the price of ISP services

(I understand this to be the case) then some UK users must be less wise than

others and there are always enough old school ties who are easily convinced

of the virtues of a high price. Where does PSINet fit into the scheme of

things? High, medium or low price? (Oh sorry, I guess you can't answer this

now as you have dropped the "Nick Sellors PSINet UK Ltd" sig and replaced it

with one that indicates you have been disowned by your employers ;-)


>Things won't change significantly until the same content is

>available from UK mirror sites (and people use them) as is available

>from US-based sites. For instance, UK companies hosting their

>websites that are aimed at the UK market in the US are pushing up UK

>ISPs international bandwidth requirements and are actually making

>the situation worse.



Oh, I see, it's the user's fault. A bit like saying "buy British! It's a

damn site more expensive, poor quality, the service sucks, but it will only

get worse if you don't and it's the patriotic thing to do."


Perhaps UK ISPs/hosts ought to talk to US ISPs/hosts to see if they can come

to some arrangement for translatlantic mirroring and/or other solutions to

the problem.


>Look at it this way - an ISP in the US knows that maybe only 5% of

>his offnet traffic is going to be outside of the US because that's

>where the main traffic sites are, so why does (s)he need to spend

>loads of money on expensive transatlantic bandwidth ?


>

>A UK ISP on the other hand, knows that upto 60-70% of his offnet

>traffic is going outside of the UK, so (s)he knows that (s)he has to

>invest in expensive international bandwidth, hence the costs of

>running the business are higher.

>



So why not cut the transatlantic traffic down by FM'ing a server or two

across the pond where most of your customers are? One of the reasons we use

a US host (other than high service levels, high-bandwidth, low-cost) is that

we use our web presence primarily to advertise to the US. In the UK a large

proportion of our potential prospects are not yet online which is why we

advertise in print over here and not in the US.


>You gets what you pays for, maybe you've been asking for the wrong

>thing.



Absolute tosh! This is one of the reasons that the UK is so slow to adapt to

new technologies and new media. People keep coming at it with this

head-in-the-sand-attitude. Shades of "Oooooooffffphphh!.... don't like the

look of that mate, it must be the widget on yer big end, it'll take a least

a month ter fix it 'an it's gonna cost yer!"


As an SME with moderate web presence requirements, we can host most of the

stuff we need to, with more than adequate access speeds, enjoy an excellent

level of customer service, be confident that everyone in the supplier

organisation knows what the business is all about and talks to each other

when required (in the UK, salesmen often know less than I do about the

technology they are supposed to be selling and seldom talk to the people in

their organisation who do. Obviously not a problem with PSINet, Nick) and

all this for less than $25 per month - about the price of a single dial-up

in the UK before Dixons decided it was time to make their mark.


No UK host/ISP can come anywhere near the level of service on offer from

Webcom in Santa Cruz, CA, and certainly nothing like the price. Yer don't

get whats yer pays fer, yer pays what yer prepared to pay and get what yer

prepared to put up wiv, mate.


Thanks for providing the cost breakdown for connection charges, Nick, it is

always useful to get the lowdown on this kind of thing if you are, like me,

one of the new generation of non-technical internet marketers.


Oh, and I didn't mean to suggested you (personally) were paid too much to do

what you do, Nick. I'm sure you are worth every penny of your salary.


Yuletide greetings to one and all!


Ray Taylor

NMC/Adplan


********************

UKNM is sponsored by Excite UK, visit us at http://www.excite.co.uk.

Email Khalil Ibrahimi

khalilexcitecorp [dot] com (mailto:khalilexcitecorp [dot] com)

 to advertise on Excite.

********************

Change your UKNM subscription use http://www.chinwag.com/uknm.html